By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Microsoft - Microsoft crafting Xbox exclusive multiplayer shooter

S.T.A.G.E. on 12 May 2012
youarebadatgames said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
chocoloco said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
chocoloco said:
hollabackenny said:
It's too bad Sony's "exclusives" are already out for Nintendo. Either way, I imagine that whatever this is, it'll be filling in Gears of Wars space on the exclusive list. People can argue about lack of variety all they want but Microsoft is about business and when 6 of the top 10 games played on Live right now are shooters, it seems smart to produce more of what sells.

Though I do not agree Sony's and Ni ntendo's exclusives are similar in any way. I agree MS is doing what they know will sell and it is the right thing to do. Corporations hardly ever cater to minorities complaining about variety on forum boards.    The funny thing is, I fit the MS gamer description more, yet play many more shooters on my ps3. Oh how the lines blur.!


Shooters have been and will continue to be popular in the future. The problem is the funneled spending habits in the west towards such genres in large consumerist nations like America. Companies like Microsoft don't make games for the sake of variety and testing them on a market. They will only invest in profitable games which of course will give the gamers a small library of games in the end. The era of cultured gaming is over essentially.

I would not over blow it and think things have changed completely to result in the end of variety and ,"cultured" gaming as I would hardly say platformers that used to rule the gaming world are cultured and full of tons more variety. What I do agree is that at least for the foreseeable future we will continue to see a dominance in shooters in the North American market and for them to continue to thrive in Europe if not grow. Now as a shooter fan that will leave me with tons of games to play as it has all gen. But when I get tired of shooters which is often I often fell that MS does least of the big three concerning variety. Especially if you take  kinect out of the picture ( as I do not care for it).  That stated, I get back to what I said before, platformers used to rule and now shooters do. In the future, the genres will continue to evolve and we will have a new popular genre, one you may like more. Nothing is static, not even Mario will rule the roost for eternity.


The New Super Mario bros game alone sold over 50 million copies on the Wii and DS. Whats that again friend? Microsofts strongest games just so happen to be shooters. Go outside of that element and they are naked. Thus...any Xbox is the perfect console for the American audience seeing as shooting is heavily in the culture. Nintendo is the best console for everyone and Sony has the ability to cater to both and fill the gaps (as you said) which Microsoft doesn't fill outside of shooters. They need to market and popularize such games to everyone and find one heavy shooter next gen instead of selling 4-5 and only using the marketing budget for one. Sony needs to help repopularize JRPG's as they would profit off of Japan heavily if they did once more.


I hope they do that so nobody will doubt that jrpgs are some of the most dated, cliche pieces of shit ever.  I'll be happy if Sony throws more money down that sinkhole.


So essentially you hope Sony fails no matter what they do.



Around the Network
S.T.A.G.E. on 12 May 2012
Dodece said:
Where to begin debunking some of the nonsense in this thread. One Microsoft is not the shooter box that some are overly zealous to proclaim. Microsoft has a good variety of exclusives for most genres. This has been proven before time and again. The majority of exclusives on the platform are not gasp shooters. Not to mention Microsoft has put out more then its fair share of novel titles.

Two there is another way to look at the popularity of shooters, and that is North American players are more social then say their Eastern counterparts. They like to play with a lot of people at the same time. Since we are being just plain hurtful. Why not say it the other way around there are a lot of players outside of North America that are just plain anti social. Who prefer to play with minimal human interaction. Shooters just mean more people to play with online. Where as other genres don't necessarily lend themselves to playing with more then a couple other people at any time. You want other genres to be more popular. Then lobby for a greater group dynamic in those games. I guarantee platforming titles would be far more popular if you could play them with a dozen players at the same time.

Three are we seriously saying Microsoft isn't innovative, or driven to try new things. Crackdown, Viva Pinata, Nuts & Bolts, and 1 vs 100 are all prime examples of thinking outside the box. Sorry these games just blow that kind of nonsense thinking out of the water.

Four I am sorry to shatter some illusions, but funneling resources towards JRPG development is not any kind of a good answer. Microsoft tried that, and it didn't work out too well for them, and foregoing shooter development on the part of Sony would have been very bad for them. One genre is dynamic, popular, and justifies online play. While the other is stagnant, formula based, and fairly unpopular. I like a good JRPG, but it is not a needed genre. You can get by without them, and Sony proved that point. While you cannot get by without having some decent exclusive shooters.

Five I cannot speak to M.A.G, but Halo has a pretty good variety of objective based game modes. Not to mention that the game is not as simple as run and gun. To succeed in Halo team play you have to maintain control of the best terrain, and keep the more dangerous weapons out of the hands of the other team. When a team doesn't work together in Halo that team usually ends up getting their asses handed to them.


It's not completely about socializing, Americans like pick up and play games and yes social ones to beat. Anything they don't have to think to hard to play that is competitive and gives them bragging rights. Shooters are competitive but that and Madden is as far as the majority will go as is the world with FIFA on a popularity scale. Halo is a fun pick up and play multiplayer. M.A.G. is team oriented, you cant win the missions without following your mission objectives between groups and going to war at the same time. It would bore the shit out of most gamers and could only be appreciated by core and PC gamers. Halo is really just like COD...its a pick up and play shooter. Sony has profited off of the Killzone franchise so I think they should focus on that franchise and kill the others and beef up the multiplayer so  Americans can be happy. Sony trying to stir up JRPG's on the PS3 exclusively could wake Japan the hell up and boost console sales over there. Those guys are waiting for an exclusive versus release. 

Back to the Microsoft exclusive shooter deal. Microsoft is known for shooters and being that it is the American console if the game is made properly they can profit off of this. Not much variety is known first party out of Microsoft. If Crackdown, Fable, Forza and Halo are any indictation of Microsofts internal prowess, then they tried harder last gen even though their efforts didn't pay off in most cases. Lets hope this works out for the best. I wish I could say Microsoft focus on variety, but American way of thinking is fuck variety, just aim for what sells. A mentality that is killing creativity. There will always be the games that make tons, but there can also be a time to show what mark you leave on gaming as a whole.



toadslayer72 on 13 May 2012
Sal.Paradise said:
Plugging that multiplayer shooter gap in the Xbox library.


I usually don't post until I read all of the posts but this is so funny, I had to come and say so.



I LOVE paying for Xbox Live! I also love that my love for it pisses off so many people.

toadslayer72 on 13 May 2012

I should have just stayed away from this thread. The MS forum is turning into a real shithole.



I LOVE paying for Xbox Live! I also love that my love for it pisses off so many people.

Jazz2K on 13 May 2012

Americans play Madden because football here is bigger than soccer stop saying stupid things please. Also it's not because people don't have to think that they prefer COD and Hao over Mag and Killzone it's because they are made in a way people will play longer and their multiplayer are well done. Stop trying to explain with stupid logic why Sony only games fail at retail. Mind you COD is also the most played shooter in Europe.

Why don't you say more Americans play dancing games and party games since that's exactly how gaming has turned to in America. Halo was very popular because of party lans, Wii and Kinect are fun because they make people have fun together (even the whole family). Xbox Live is popular because it has a great community and we can talk to eachother while playing, party chat, cross game chat etc. See the similarity here? Socializing. Xbox's first moto was "It's good to play together!" and it's true. Now it's "Jump in!" like in get on with us. It's all about socializing.

Why do you think games sell better when they have multiplayer options, and almost every devs want to put somekind of multiplayer options in their games... jrpgs are getting less and less interresting because they're still stuck in the past and the designs are not appealing to Americans. Guys should look like guys not lesbians on hormones. Western rpgs sell a lot so it's not like we don't like rpgs, on the contrary, look at skyrim, mass effect, fallout, fable they all sell well. They have so much that jrpgs don't have like choices and the ability to create your character. Jrpgs are always so linear with no real choices except for yes or no ans they always throw you the same feminine spiky haired hero...



Around the Network
Millenium on 13 May 2012
toadslayer72 said:
I should have just stayed away from this thread. The MS forum is turning into a real shithole.

Only proper response to the trolling and spamming can be:

Agreed though, I can't understand why peeps who can't be civil  can't just stay at the forum section of the company they support.



sales2099 on 13 May 2012

Its funny people here condem MS for investing in kinect, now that they are making a core game they are condemed for lacking variety.

Pretending Fez, Trails evolution, Witcher 2, Sine Mora, Minecraft, The Splatters, Anamoly Warzone Earth dont exist....all 2012 360 releases so far that arent shooters.



Xbox: Best hardware, Game Pass best value, best BC, more 1st party genres and multiplayer titles. 

 

ironmanDX on 13 May 2012

I hope its a free online shooter... Are there any on consoles?



Jazz2K on 13 May 2012

Yea whatever MS does is bad according to some in here. All they do is unoriginal and made to please the majority of their fans which are dumb people... great!



Rinzlerz62 on 13 May 2012

Okay, im going to chime in here.

What Microsoft have done this year is really amazing. They clearly erased the line that seperated retail games from arcade games. The last month alone has been amazing. Trials Evo and Minecraft. Both "AAA" titles 20 Dollars or under. Both games i have put more time into then any game in the last few years.

There is no difference anymore. When i look at the new Ps3 battle royal game, or twisted metal for instance, there is not reason ps3 gamers should have had to pay 60 bux each for those games. Those both would have been 15 dollar downloads on xbox. Especially since the fact twisted Metal has no Online community aymore and they have announced they have no plans for DLC.

My point is this: The fact MS could have packaged minecraft and charged 40 dollars and didnt is amazing, TRIALS evo I would easily pay 30 bux for, but it was 15.

People just look at HALO 4 and say"OH thats the only 60 dollars game that uses a controller this year? thats the only game coming out, and look its a shooter"

Open your eyes people, i turn my xbox on everyday and im never short of a variety games to play.